yip. it's v.hard to get the message out if 80% of your MSM is owned by 5 brexite tory/ukip tax avoiding bastages with the other big one there just push the ukok message. this to me is proper investigate juronisem. and another opportunity to show the buggers for what they are. Wings Over Scotland | What’s left out
The only constant as far as I can see in the media is that the only ones posting the truth coincidentally happen to be the guys I agree with. For some reason, the guys I disagree with are just publishing propaganda and lies. I know, right! What are the odds?
i dont know loz, are they the ones that give unedited links,interviews and all the rest of it? if not, do your self a favor and ignore it
Proper decent journalists are still out there it's just many have their hands tied by their owner/ employers who like to run roughshod over democracy and print lies and half truths.
yip. but what i do know is when it comes to wings it doesn't produce opinion pieces. just debunks and exposes bull. the kind of bull that can bring down governments and wreck peoples lives. if yer not fussed, keep buying the telegraph, guardian, times etc. :smileys:
Journalism and their ability to dig for the truths has paid heavily for exposing the MPs expenses scandal. Those in power did not like the truth being exposed there one tiny little bit. Those most recent scandal of the Panama papers was exposed by German journalists.
That's what happens when you give your pluses and minuses to the gutter press to pass on your thoughts
I find there are 3 types of information The type you think suits your truth so it must be true The type that is made by and for people running down the street naked with a pair of Y fronts on on their head under their tin foil hat and pencils up their nostrils shouting the truth is suppressed by the media And lastly, the HUGE spectrum between the two
Waffle and piffle Even the PM admits we are standing 'on the edge of a cliff'. Theresa May bids to reassure business on Brexit 'cliff-edge' - BBC News
Erm nope she didn't. She mentioned others did not want a cliff edge, which is different from her saying this is one Theresa May seeking transitional Brexit deal to avoid 'cliff edge' from 29-44 seconds
yip. 4 types your, mine. somewhere in the middle ( if no indisputable evidence available) then the kind you witnessed in the article. all there in the ledger and signed off. and from the kind of site i would of avoided like the plague up until the last two years or so. i took my info from the MSM. didn't fancy getting brain washed from no dodgy site. DOH!.
She used the word 'cliff edge'. She is obviuosly coming to the same conclusion that to leave the EU without a sensible viable trade deal with the EU would be suicidal for the economy.
I think she is aware some remainers have used the term cliff edge and commented on it. I'm sure she has said at some time "I'm just going for a shit Philip" But to then attribute it to her saying Brexit is shit would be wrong. Most people who supported Brexit and more that are getting used to it so want to get on with it, also want the best deal we can, that isn't something new. Today she spoke at the CBI, they understood a direction and keeping negotiations in house until you then have a package to present to your shareholders (in our case, voters) for final consideration Where much of the alleged confusion comes from is media and opportunists. News is now a 24 hour business but there are so many outlets that they are all trying to outdo each other. Add that to people like Cameron who seemed to search out cameras and someone like May can seem an annoyance. She isn't in a camera need every 5 minutes and doesn't feel the need to be pr dependent. This getting on with government without the need for fanfare is what frustrates many media and opposition but isn't this what we pay our government to do, get on with it?
There is more than one option of package which is why it should be debated properly in Parliament. If they want to, turn off the cameras and debate in private but to let a handful of people decide the best route forward is ridiculous especially when most are millionaires and don't have to worry about paying their bills.
That's a good point and probably sensible. I see nothing particularly wrong with other people being involved, but I'd have to say that a pre requisite of involvement must be that an NDA is signed and leaked information would be classed as illegal and charges brought against those who did. Therfore parliament probably isn't the place to do it. Negotiations and tactics at this level need to remain strictly confidential, but there are some that will quickly use any information to build a soapbox and use it for political gain.....a small feisty Scottish lady might for instance use it to her advantage.....Although I'm not specifying anyone in particular your honour.
If the PM and her cronies decide on one idea and then once they take it back to Parliament for a vote it gets thrown out, then we are back to square one and the pound will probably plummet like a stone.
